The Great 35mm v. Digital Debate
 

Let me get this out of the way before ANYTHING else. It is my least favorite topic, and one that (unfortunately) comes up all too often.

Don't confuse a DSLR with a 35mm film camera. Even though they may have a physical resemblance, they are different animals and each serves a different purpose. Neither is "better," they are just tools in the box. You don't hear auto mechanics arguing that a socket is "better" than a combination wrench, that would be silly. They are both tools and both can live peacefully beside each other in the box. They each have strong and weak points. A pro knows which tool is the correct one for the job. That's the reason we have so much stuff, NOT because we collect toys. If a tool doesn't make us money, it's just taking up space in the tool box (and adding weight).

  I was late to the DSLR party... on purpose. Not being one to buy the newest technology "just because it's new", I waited until I saw results from DSLR's that I liked, and at a price point I could justify. That balance of price point and quality level appeared (to me) in the form of the Nikon D50. I now shoot most of my day gig work with a Nikon D80 - a wonderful piece of equipment. My medium and large format gear still get a lot of use, but the image quality from my DSLR's is far superior to shooting 35mm color negative film.
  In my not so humble opinion, film still can't be beat for black & white work. Maybe it's because I actually like the grain of B&W film, but B&W out of a digital camera doesn't do it for me.
   
 

By the way, if you really find it necessary to argue which is "better," put your argument into a context that makes sense, else <THWACK>

   
 
Back
Home